April 27, 2011

"The SaVE Act implicitly assumes the guilt of students accused of sexual violence or stalking and ensures that guilt is fairly easy to establish."

Writes Wendy Kaminer in The Atlantic:
It requires schools to employ the lowest possible standard of proof -- a preponderance of evidence -- in disciplinary hearings....

Violence prevention programs mandated by the SaVE Act are almost as worrying as the mandatory disciplinary proceedings. Schools must conduct prevention and awareness programs for all new students and employees. In addition to providing relatively objective information about reporting, protective measures, and disciplinary procedures, administrators must lay down the law on highly subjective matters, like "the elements of healthy relationships" and "bystander intervention"  -- the "safe and positive options" open to someone who perceives a risk of violence or stalking.

Prevention programs must also include a "definition of consent in reference to sexual activity," a requirement reminiscent of the notorious, unself-consciously absurd sexual consent guidelines issued by the late Antioch College in the 1990s. Its detailed prescription for consensual sex included these mandates: "The person(s) who initiate(s) the sexual activity is responsible for asking for consent. The person(s) who are asked are responsible for verbally responding. Each new level of sexual activity requires consent."

Policies like these are easily mocked, but there's nothing funny about the prospect of enforcing them with little regard for due process.

57 comments:

PaulV said...

That damn Constitution again

MarkG said...

Why are universities so backwards when it comes to basic human rights?

Maguro said...

"The person(s) who initiate(s) the sexual activity is responsible for asking for consent. The person(s) who are asked are responsible for verbally responding. Each new level of sexual activity requires consent."

Make sure you show up to your date with a blue or black pen and pre-filled 1st Base, 2nd Base, 3rd Base and Home Plate consent forms. Very romantic.

Sixty Grit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Drill SGT said...

Really bad law:

If this is a huge issue, are we going to have a Bar law next?

interactions between 20 something adults take place in environments beyond college.

my favorite part:

"'preponderance of the evidence' means that if a school thinks there is as little as a 50.001% chance that the accused is guilty, the accused must be disciplined." It also means that students may be found guilty of conduct that constitutes a criminal offense, expelled, and exposed to civil and criminal liability without any of the protections afforded criminal defendants in formal judicial proceedings, including representation by counsel.

so you provide info to one side in what normally is she said/ he said, then decide the guilt of the party that is already perceived to be guilty based on 50.1% of the evidence.

lynchings writ large...

I look forward to the day when males are officially given minority protection and preference on college campuses

Mary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
t-man said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Drill SGT said...

Make sure you show up to your date with a blue or black pen and pre-filled 1st Base, 2nd Base, 3rd Base and Home Plate consent forms

but remember, the presence of any alcohol results in the inability to give informed consent, so make sure you get a blood sample.

Mary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Hagar said...

Orwell lives!

traditionalguy said...

The world of secret one on one activity has always been a "swearing contest" area. Judges trying to sort that out have always looked for some extrinsic evidence...give us something before we destroy the accused. Now the end is here. All complaints are presumed true. The dirty minded men are now forbidden to make sexual overtures to females. That is a triumph for puritan gotcha power over immoral sex.

TMink said...

"Why are universities so backwards when it comes to basic human rights?"

Because "feminist" policies like these are written by either untreated se4xual abuse victims or borderline personality disordered people. They are professional or lifelong victims in search of a male perp.

The entire concept of a hostile work environment rests alone on the perception of the complainer. Just the perception. And I am here to tell you that borderlines perceive EVERYTHING as hostile. When they are not perceiving it as the best thing evah.

Trey

themightypuck said...

There was a great Chappell Show bit with Rashida Jones and Dave Chappell on this very subject.

Tim the Shrubber said...

So, my alma matter banned alcohol on campus (including Greek houses) in 2000, and currently they are phasing out smoking anywhere campus by 2014. Looks like the SaVE act will get rid of sex next.

So, no drinking, no smoking and no f---ing...sounds more like Bringham Young University everyday.

Firehand said...

Hey, the Constitution is all very nice, but we have PC-at-any-cost matters to deal with here! What's screwing up some males life forever compared to that?

PaulV said...

Tim the Shrubber said...

So, no drinking, no smoking and no f---ing...sounds more like Bringham Young University everyday.

The Norfolk Academy cheer:
We don't drink, we don't smoke, Norfolk!

Comrade X said...

sounds like a bearded Spock version of Sharia.

Mary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
chr1 said...

We need a Czar!

pst314 said...

"Why are universities so backwards when it comes to basic human rights?"

Because most academics are cowardly, unprincipled slime who think they are paragons of all that is wise and good. This combination allows them to do evil with a song in their hearts.

damikesc said...

So feminists and misogynists agree that women are too inept to handle themselves?

Man, those battles for equality seem like a waste of time, don't they?

vnjagvet said...

Kudos to Wendy Kaminer and the Atlantic for alerting us to this very bad proposed legislation. If it passes, I fear for my grandchildren.

Mary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
damikesc said...

The hardcore university feminist groups. The loons who used to refer to themselves as "womyn" and the like.

I'm always impressed at how condescending special interest groups are towards they profess to represent.

Mary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Phil 3:14 said...

conservative proposal wrapped in a liberal facade

The Crack Emcee said...

"The person(s) who initiate(s) the sexual activity is responsible for asking for consent. The person(s) who are asked are responsible for verbally responding. Each new level of sexual activity requires consent."

Bwaaaaa-haaaaa-haaaaaaa-haaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!

What world do these people live in? I bet most now are awful in bed.

They're definitely awful in the rest of their lives.

Scott M said...

Bwaaaaa-haaaaa-haaaaaaa-haaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!

Agreed.

How does writing a policy, which had to have been read and handled by many so-called "learned" individuals, remove the he-said/she-said from the whole thing?

The policy changes nothing and only adds stand-up comedic fare

Dark Eden said...

Sadly I think its going to take women who are not misandrists to stand up to these harpies and fight back against these insane rules.

But you know a part of me does not mind crazy leftoid college students suffering from the results of crazy leftoid rules.

edutcher said...

This is what happens when you put lawyers who got Cs in law school in charge of anything.

It also says something about a curriculum where study of the Constitution averages about a week.

vnjagvet said...

I just couldn't pass up this wv for this thread:

" Fibess" -- one who falsely accuses a former boyfriend of failing to obtain the requisite consent for a roll in the hay.

Terry said...

Yawn.

More of the ongoing effort that has established that men are but a virus (STD in this case) in the body of a society rightfully made up of women.

WV: bever

Will some female here kindly grant me permission to comment on my WV?

Joe said...

This sounds like a Monty Python sketch.

Guy: May I kiss your breasts?
Girl: How?
Guy: Well, I was thinking of starting at the edge of the areola and working in.
Girl: Only if your start on the right side of my left breast.

Twenty seconds later

Girl: You said nothing about nibbling my nipple. You have raped me. I'm calling the police.

Alex said...

This is simply the revenge of the ugly women who can't stand all that hot sex going on.

Alex said...

The hardcore university feminist groups. The loons who used to refer to themselves as "womyn" and the like.

Their the ones you would never want to see naked even they paid you.

Moose said...

Making universities safer for women! Or making all students female!
Whatever!

Shanna said...

Make sure you show up to your date with a blue or black pen and pre-filled 1st Base, 2nd Base, 3rd Base and Home Plate consent forms. Very romantic.

Yeah, that's a little/lot ridiculous. And if you've already been going to base number 2, do you have to reapply for permission every time? These people don't think at all before they write this stuff, do they?

Shanna said...

Also, if you aren't saying 'get the hell off me', you are probably consenting.

RichardS said...

Good for the diversity and sensitivity training business.

Conserve Liberty said...

Once again, as soon as college students return to behaving as ladies and gentlemen these problems all go away.

I'm NOT a prude, nor a "Christian." I have daughters in college. I was a fraternity member.

I never had any of these troubles.

Stop trying to hook up with anything that has two legs to part. Treat women as ladies. Have sex wih your girlfriend, not with your date.

You might even stay married to her for 32 years.

Joe said...

I love your inate sexism Liberty. The burden is still on the man; women are weak, fragile creatures who are unable make decisions on their own and must be protected. Let's cut through the PC bullshit and put it simply:

Women, stop getting drunk and fucking whoever is in the room. If you do, own up to it and stop whining.

There, problem solved.

Shanna said...

There, problem solved.

That certainly doesn't solve the problem of idiots in congress trying to pass ridiculous legislation.

Of course, the real problem is that it's just very hard to prove one way or the other when you are dealing with rape or sexual assault that occurs on any sort of "date", and this legislation (and telling people not to get drunk and have sex) really doesn't do anything to solve that problem because it's not a solvable probelm. It just is.

Bob said...

People on the right tend to reflexively blame this kind of stuff on the faculty; and it's certainly true that university faculty on average lean well to the left.

But this obsessive control of student behavior stuff comes almost entirely from the Student Affairs industry. These people are full time administrators, not teaching faculty, and they are the folks who run the dorms, the student centers, the cafeterias, the student clubs and activities, etc. They are a vast and well organized industry, and they exist because the faculty happily abrogated their responsibility for campus life in the 1960s and 1970s. If you seriously want to look into issues like this, look at the Student Affairs webpages at your favorite university, because that's where it comes from. (Remember FIRE's work on the University of Delaware Residence Life program?)

Conserve Liberty said...

@Joe: you miss my point entirely. Yes I am a a sexist. Explicitly. Not innately.

And you are brainwashed by the feminists.

Men and women are different. They may have equal opportunity but they are different. When was the last time a leering woman got a man drunk on his back, stripped off his boxers and had her way wih him?.

Treat women like ladies and all the feminist claptrap and
laws are immediately rendered moot. And you'll never be
accused. And you'll make the feminists crazy. .

We assume all mEn always want to score, so we play right into the victimhood agenda. Bad strategy.

But you, sir, are no gentleman, so you wouldn't understand

Pogo said...

I think this is where flogging fits best.

The Crack Emcee said...

Oooh, Conserve Liberty is the shit. That smooth approach, coupled with the TJ photo?

I wouldn't fuck with him.

Mary said...

"When was the last time a leering woman got a man drunk on his back, stripped off his boxers and had her way wih him?"


Briefs count? You looking for a calendar date, or a clock time, hun?

;-)

Mary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Conserve Liberty said...

@ Mary: aka "Saddle Up, Sally!"

Against his will.

Rise above the narrative. Open a door for a feminist today.

Mary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Conserve Liberty said...

My grandmother taught me to be a gentleman to all people at all times (not just those in need of help).

I don't claim to be good at it - it isn't natural for me. I work at it.

My point is, all these problems with harassment accusations would quite simply disappear if men (and women) stopped behaving so incredibly boorishly.

I mean we basically DO constantly harass women; treat them like objects or conquests; and civil society disappeared long ago. They just act like they want us to behave that way - until they don't.

The best victory is to turn the entire thing around and treat the feminists with the most genteel deference, while simultaneously acknowledging their achievements. Drives 'em crazy because they can't accuse me of anything, even though they hate it.

Self denial has value. They can't lie about the sex if I was never there having sex.

And if my girlfriend (or wife) wants to ride my pommel, well I'll gladly accommodate her. And I won't regret it in the morning.

Tim said...

I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned it yet, but this sounds *very* similar to the sexual harassment policy of Antioch College from the early '90s. Doesn't anybody else remember how mercilessly that was mocked at the time? And it got a lot of publicity from Rush, I remember. I was in college then (elsewhere), so maybe it stands out more in my mind as a result.

The key thing was that each level of sexual activity required *explict* verbal consent.

As much as I don't (and didn't) think students needed to be fooling around before marriage, this was still an awful policy.

Mary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mary said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
damikesc said...

Conserve, as we saw with the Duke case, having sex is not needed to make a claim of rape.

veni vidi vici said...

Comrade X said...
"sounds like a bearded Spock version of Sharia."

Given its feministing-fisting nature, I'd venture that it sounds more like a bearded clam version of Sharia.

abeer ahmed said...

visit us on lifeandstylemag.com
http://whois.domaintasks.com/lifeandstylemag.com